Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited

395 ITR 247High Court2017#2342 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited authority for?

Deduction under Section 80IA is allowable for captive power generation. The price for calculating this deduction is the rate at which the electricity board supplies power to its consumers, rather than the rate at which power generating companies supply to the electricity board.

49

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Commissioner v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited · 395 ITR 247 · Section 80IA · deduction captive power · 80IA(8) · specified domestic transaction · Section 92BA · Section 92F · electricity transfer price · consumer electricity rate · Arm's Length Price

Sections most often in play

Section 80IASection 115JBSection 80A(6)Section 14ASection 80IA(8)Section 92BASection 92FSection 143(3)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(8)section 92f(ii)section 86section 92basection 92fspecified domestic transactiondeduction under section 80iasection 80iaeligible businesstested partydeduction u/s 80iasection 92b

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited

DCIT, Corporate Circle -2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2145/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 2145 & 2210/Chny/2017, Ita 737/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2008-09 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. The India Cements Ltd., Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandel Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: 2038/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. The India Cements Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandal Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & Co No.: 76/Chny/2018 (In Ita No.737/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. The India Cements Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandal Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 115VSection 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव,"या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos: 2145 & 2210/CHNY/2017, ITA 737/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2008-09 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. The India Cements Ltd., Income Tax, v. No.93, Coromandel Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. PAN: AAACT 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर…

The India Cements Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai

In the result, the cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2038/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 2145 & 2210/Chny/2017, Ita 737/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2008-09 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. The India Cements Ltd., Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandel Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No: 2038/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. The India Cements Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandal Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & Co No.: 76/Chny/2018 (In Ita No.737/Chny/2018) िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. The India Cements Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, V. No.93, Coromandal Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. Pan: Aaact 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 115VSection 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव,"या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos: 2145 & 2210/CHNY/2017, ITA 737/CHNY/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2008-09 & 2013-14 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. The India Cements Ltd., Income Tax, v. No.93, Coromandel Towers, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Santhome High Road, Chennai – 34. R.A. Puram, Chennai – 600 028. PAN: AAACT 1728P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर…

D.C.I.T., Circla-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1672/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 250Section 3Section 6Section 8Section 80ASection 80ISection 92C

…ssessee and we are of the opinion that this appeal does not involve any substantial question of law and is, therefore, not admitted and thus rejected.” 8.10. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Gujarat Alkalies and Chemicals Ltd., [2017] 395 ITR 247 (Guj.) has held the market value of per unit of electricity sold by the assessee in the open market, is the price charged by the Gujarat Electricity Board to its customers. 8.11. The Hon’ble Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur in the case of CIT vs. Godawari Power & Ispat Ltd., Tax Case Nos. 31, 32 & 34 of 2012 order dated 02.08.20013 held as fo…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 2416/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate

…iles vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein one of us is a party. This view of ours is also supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited reported in 395 ITR 247(Guj.), wherein it has been held that the deduction u/s.80IA was allowable to the for generation of power for captive ITA Nos. 2412, 2413, 2414, 2415 & 2416/Chny/2019 :- 19 -: consumption and that the rate of power generation at which the electricity board supplied power to its consumers rather than the rate at which the power generating companie…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 2415/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate

…iles vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein one of us is a party. This view of ours is also supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited reported in 395 ITR 247(Guj.), wherein it has been held that the deduction u/s.80IA was allowable to the for generation of power for captive ITA Nos. 2412, 2413, 2414, 2415 & 2416/Chny/2019 :- 19 -: consumption and that the rate of power generation at which the electricity board supplied power to its consumers rather than the rate at which the power generating companie…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 2414/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate

…iles vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein one of us is a party. This view of ours is also supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited reported in 395 ITR 247(Guj.), wherein it has been held that the deduction u/s.80IA was allowable to the for generation of power for captive ITA Nos. 2412, 2413, 2414, 2415 & 2416/Chny/2019 :- 19 -: consumption and that the rate of power generation at which the electricity board supplied power to its consumers rather than the rate at which the power generating companie…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 2413/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate

…iles vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein one of us is a party. This view of ours is also supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited reported in 395 ITR 247(Guj.), wherein it has been held that the deduction u/s.80IA was allowable to the for generation of power for captive ITA Nos. 2412, 2413, 2414, 2415 & 2416/Chny/2019 :- 19 -: consumption and that the rate of power generation at which the electricity board supplied power to its consumers rather than the rate at which the power generating companie…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. The India Cements Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in I

ITA 2412/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Mr. Saroj Kumar, Advocate

…iles vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, wherein one of us is a party. This view of ours is also supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gujarat Alkalies Chemicals Limited reported in 395 ITR 247(Guj.), wherein it has been held that the deduction u/s.80IA was allowable to the for generation of power for captive ITA Nos. 2412, 2413, 2414, 2415 & 2416/Chny/2019 :- 19 -: consumption and that the rate of power generation at which the electricity board supplied power to its consumers rather than the rate at which the power generating companie…

Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Hisar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 893/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 893/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Jindal Steel & Power Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Income Tax, Hisar Circle, Place, New Delhi-110066 Hisar (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacj7079D Assessee By : Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv., Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Adv., Ms. Ananya Kapoor, Adv. & Ms. Pallavi Saigal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing :05.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Assessing Officer U/S 143(3)/144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 29.10.2018 For Assessment Years 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjay I. Bara, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80I

…ity in computing the market value by taking into account the rate charged to a supplier: it should have been compared with the market value of power supplied to a consumer." 10. Gujarat High Court in case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd. [2017] 395 ITR 247/88 taxmann.com 722 also had occasion to examine such an issue. It referred to earlier order in case of Asstt. CIT v. Pragati Glass Works (P.) Ltd. [Tax Appeal No. 1646 of 2010, dated 30-1-2012] in which following observations were made:— "7. To our mind, Tribunal has committed no error. Assessing Officer and CIT (Appeals) while adopting Rs. 4.51…